' SAIYED SAEED ASHHAD, J.---This Constitutional petition has been filed by the above fourteen petitioners, who are holding the post of Electronics Technicians in Group-IV in the service of respondent No, 1, Civil Aviation Authority.
1. The brief facts of the case are that in pursuance of advertisement in the Daily Jang of April, 1990 inviting applications for appointment as Electronics Technicians, the petitioners along with others were selected. The eligibility for appointment to the above posts was either F.Sc. (Pre-Engineering) in 2nd Division or Matriculate with three years' Diploma in Associate Engineering from any recognized Polytechnic Institution. The petitioners' qualification was F.Sc. (Pre-Engineering) and after their selection they were required to undergo one year training in electronics at P.A.F. School of Electronics Korangi Creek, Karachi and after completion thereof they were appointed as Electronics Technicians in the service of Civil Aviation Authority in Group-IV. Along with the petitioners a number of candidates holding the qualification of matriculation with three years' diploma of Associate Engineer in Electronics were also selected and were directed to undergo one years's training as above and on successful completion thereof they were also appointed as Electronics Technicians, In February, 1994, the CAA decided to upgrade the post of Technicians from PG-IV to PG-V and re-designated them as Sub-Engineers and the basic qualification for up gradation for the post of Electronics Technician was holding of three years' diploma of Associate Engineering in Electronics and this decision was enforceable from 19-2-1994, and a list of Electronics Technicians upgraded to PG-V and redesigned as Sub-Engineers was issued but the names of petitioners are not included therein though they were also qualified and eligible for up gradation from PG-IV to PG-V and to be redesignated as Sub-Engineers. The petitioners wrote various letters and made representations to the respondents but to not avail and hence the petition.
2. We have heard the arguments of Mr. Kunwar Mukhtar Ahmed, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. Amir Hani Muslim, learned counsel for the respondents, who appeared in pursuance of pre- admission notices issued to the respondents.,
3. Mr. Kunwar Mukhtar Ahmed vehemently criticized and challenged the decision of the respondents in not upgrading the petitioners from PG-IV to PG-V and not redesigning them as Sub-Engineers instead of Electronics Technicians on the ground that the petitioners were holding the same qualifications as were held by the Electronics Technicians who were upgraded from PG- IV to PG-V and were redesigned as Sub-Engineers. In this connection he submitted that the petitioners were holding the qualification of F.Sc. (Pre-Engineering) in 2nd Division and after being selected had undergone one year training in electronics in the P.A.F. School of Electronics, Korangi Creek, Karachi, and were awarded a Diploma in the relevant technology and that this Diploma is equivalent to three years' Post Matric Polytechnic Diploma of Associate Engineering in Electronics as per Item No,62 on page 146 of "A Book of Equivalence of Educational Certificates in Pakistan", issued by the Inter Board Committee of Chairmen, Ministry of Education, Government of Pakistan, Islamabad, Annexure 'H' to the petition. Mr. Kunwer Mukhtar Ahmed further submitted that after award of the above diploma by the P.A.F. School of Electronics, Korangi Creek, Karachi, the petitioners hold equivalent and similar qualifications as are held by the technicians holding three years' Diploma of Associate Engineering in Electronics and, subsequently, the action of the respondents in upgrading only those Electronics Technicians who are holding three years' Diploma of Associate Engineering and ignoring the Electronics Technicians, who hold a Diploma equivalent to the three years' Diploma of Associate Engineers was an act of discrimination, bias and was with mala fide intention which resulted in causing the hardships as well as monetary loss. Mr. Kunwer Mukhtar Ahmed also placed reliance on Office Memorandum issued by Government of Pakistan, Ministry of Fuel, Power and Natural Resources, Islamabad, dated 16-11-1974, whereby certain benefits in the nature of higher starting pay; placement of 25% of total posts of Diploma Engineers in Grade-16; resanction of 25 per cent. Of total' posts in Grade-17 for Diploma Engineers and designating them as Sub-Engineers, were provided and submitted that since the petitioners were holding qualifications equivalent to Diploma Engineers, they were entitled to the benefits provided for the Diploma Engineers in the above Office Memorandum. He submitted that the decision of the respondents be set aside and they be directed to upgrade the petitioners to PG-V and redesignate them as Sub-Engineers.
4. Mr. Amir Hani Muslim, the learned counsel for the respondents submitted that the petitioners did not have a right to claim any benefit on account of any qualification which was provided to them at the expenses of C.A.A., besides the fact that they are being treated as having a qualification equivalent to Post Matric three diploma on account of "A Book of Equivalence of Educational Certificates in Pakistan", Annexure 'H' and they are not be equated or treated at par with the Electronics Technicians who are holding Post Matric three years' Diploma of Associate Engineers inasmuch as they did not study and undergo practical training at any Polytechnic Institution for obtaining the above Post Matric Diploma. He further submitted that even these Electronics Technicians, who were selected on the basis of holding post matric three years' diploma had also undergone advanced training in Electronics either at the P.A.F. School of Electronics, or C.A.
Technical Institute at Hyderabad and were awarded the same Diplomas which were awarded to the Electronics Technicians, who were selected on the basis of having passed F.Sc. (Pre- Engineering) in 2nd Division. He further submitted that if the contention of Mr. Kunwer Mukhtar Ahmed is to be accepted then the Electronics Technicians who have been upgraded from PG-IV to PG-V and redesignated as Sub-Engineers would be holding two diplomas of Associate Engineers and the petitioners could not be equated or treated at par with them and were definitely inferior in educational qualification and eligibility and were not entitled either to be upgraded or redesigned as above.
5. The posts of Electronics Technicians in PG-IV were filled in April, 1990 from amongst the candidates who were holding two different kinds of qualifications, that is to say, one set of candidates had passed F.Sc. (Pre-Engineering) in 2nd Division and other set of candidates were holding three years' Diploma of Associate Engineering after passing Matriculation examination. The one hundred and fourth (104) extraordinary meeting of CAA held on 19-2-1994 approved upgradation of the post of Electronics Technicians from PG-IV to PG-V only in respect of incumbents who were holding Post Matric three years' Diploma of Associate Engineering and also redesigned them as Sub-Engineers. The petitioners admittedly, were not holding Post Matric three years' Diploma of Associate Engineering at the time of their selection for appointments as Electronics Technicians. No doubt, that after having been selected to the post of Electronics Technicians they had undergone one year training in Radio Technology in the P.A.F. School of Electronics, Korangi Creek, Karachi, and were awarded a Diploma, which according to "A Book of Equivalence" Annexure H to the petition, and the certificate issued by the Secretary, Sindh Board of Technical Education, Annexure H/1 is to be treated as equivalent to three years' Post Matric Polytechnic Diploma of Associate Engineer, but the fact remains that the petitioners did not actually obtain a three years Post, Matric Diploma of Associate Engineers from any Polytechnic Institution and further that the aforesaid advance course of Electronics at P.A.F. School of Electronics, Korangi Creek, Karachi, which resulted in Diploma in Electronics was completed by them after they had been selected for appointment to the posts of Electronics Technicians and was provided to them by the respondents at their cost.
6. The selection letters as Trainee Electronics Technicians issued to the petitioners required them to undergo one year's training at the School of Electronic, PAF Base Korangi Creek, Karachi and after successful completion thereof they were to be appointed as Electronics Technicians in PG-IV. Thus, the above training imparted to the petitioners resulting in awarding to them Diploma in Radio Technology was an essential requirement for their appointment as Electronics Technicians and, consequently the petitioners could not claim a further benefit on the basis of such Diplomas as they had already been provided the benefit thereof earlier, when they were appointed Electronics Technicians in PG-IV. There is another aspect of the case which disentitles the petitioners from claiming up gradation of the posts held by them from PG-IV to PG-V and resignation thereof as Sub-Engineers. The Executive Committee of respondent No, 1 in its 104th extraordinary meeting had decided to upgrade and redesign ate those Electronics Technicians who possessed the basic qualification of Diploma in Associate Engineering. The use of the words "basic qualification of Diploma in Associate Engineering" in relation to the Electronics Technicians to be upgraded and redesigned contemplated that they should have held or possessed Post Matric diplomas in Associate Engineering at the time of their selection as Trainee Electronics as such Diploma was one of the two requisite qualifications for being eligible for appointment as Electronics Technicians, the other qualification being F.Sc. (Pre-Engineering). If the intention of the respondents was to upgrade and redesign ate all the Electronics Technicians then the words "basic qualification of diploma in Associate Engineering" were not required to be mentioned in the resolution and the fact such words were used therein, leads to an irresistible presumption that the respondents had intended to upgrade and redesignate only those Electronics Technicians who held or possessed Post Matric three years' diploma in Associate Engineering at the time of their selection as Trainee Electronics Technicians for subsequent appointment as Electronics Technicians. In the circumstances, the petitioners would have no right to up gradation and redesignation in pursuance of the resolution of 104th extraordinary meeting of the Executive Committee of respondent No,1 . Since the petitioners did not possess the Post Matric three years Diploma in Associate Engineering prior to their selection, they would also have no right to claim any of the benefits provided to the Diploma in Associate Engineers in the Office Memorandum dated 16-11-1974.
7. Even otherwise, the petitioners have no right to invoke the Constitutional jurisdiction of this Court and no relief can be provided to them in view of the fact that the respondent No, 1 has framed its own Rules and Regulations for the purposes of appointments, promotions, dismissal, etc. For its employees in exercise of its powers under section 27 of the Civil Aviation Authority Ordinance, 1982, which do not have statutory sanction and cannot be termed as statutory regulation and violation thereof would not give right to an employee of respondent No, 1 to approach this Court in writ jurisdiction for redress of his grievance. Reference is made to the cases of Muhammad Iqbal Chaudhry etc. v. Civil Aviation Authority, etc. reported in 1995 PLC (C.S.) 421; and Syed Mubashar Zawar and 16 others v. M/s. Civil Aviation Authority and another, reported in 1996 PLC (C.S.) page
528. In both these cases which were decided by this Court, it has been held that the Service Rules and Regulations framed by respondent No, 1 are not statutory rules and cannot be enforced in writ jurisdiction in case of their violation.
8. The above petition was dismissed in limine on 26-2-1997 by a short order for the reasons to be recorded later. The above are the reasons for its dismissal.